Associated PressSpeaker Robert DeLeo, D-Revere, speaks to reporters at a Statehouse news conference, Friday,July. 30, 2010, where legislative leaders announced a bill approving the licensing of three casinos and two slot parlors which is at odds with Gov. Deval Patrick's proposal for two casinos and a single slot machine parlor. (AP Photo/Josh Reynolds)

BOSTON - Gov. Deval L. Patrick on Friday night criticized a compromise bill on expanded gambling that calls for three resort casinos and slot machines for two racetracks, saying it would basically give slots to two tracks in the southeast part of the state without competitive bids.

Minutes after legislators held a Statehouse press conference to announce details of the landmark bill, Patrick released a statement saying the agreement is unacceptable to him. Patrick made clear he would not sign the bill. His options are to veto the bill or send it back with an amendment.

“Unfortunately, they have sent me something I cannot support,” the governor said during a press conference on Friday night in his office.

Patrick on Thursday revised his opposition to slots at the tracks, saying he would support one slot parlor if legislators also agreed to pass certain bills. Patrick said slots at the tracks would not produce jobs at the highest wages and benefits and would contribute to social costs.

Deval Patrick

Patrick said he was disappointed that the bill includes two slot facilities. Since the former Wonderland dog track in Revere and the Suffolk Downs horse track in East Boston have announced they are teaming up to bid for a casino, the bill means the slots would all but automatically go to a horse track in Plainville and a former dog track in Raynham, according to Patrick.

Patrick said it is “a serious problem” that the bid process will not be transparent or competitive.

Patrick’s statement was sobering to many legislators and put a damper on any possible celebrations by casino supporters.

Sen. Stanley C. Rosenberg, D-Amherst, said the bill is structured so that Patrick would need to veto the entire bill if he is opposed. The bill is written in such a way that the governor could not issue a line-item veto targeting the two racinos, but would have to issue an up-or-down veto on all of the gambling venues, including the three casinos, which he supports.

If Patrick vetoes the bill, it would likely stand, since the Senate lacks the two-thirds vote needed for an override, said Sen. Stephen J. Buoniconti, D-West Springfield. "The governor’s veto might in fact hold,” he said.

Senate President Therese Murray said the Senate would not meet again past Saturday in formal sessions this year. Formal sessions end at midnight on Saturday, leaving only informal sessions with no roll calls for the rest of this year.

The Senate and the state House of Representatives are planning to meet on Saturday and are expected to vote to approve the bill.

Patrick’s opposition could quash a victory for Western Massachusetts legislators who support casinos.

Under the bill, Western Massachusetts is flatly guaranteed a casino resort. The bill says casinos would be located in three geographic zones including one that includes the four counties of Western Massachusetts.

Sen. Gale D. Candaras, D-Wilbraham, said that she and Sens. Buoniconti and Michael R. Knapik insisted on locating a casino in Western Massachusetts.

“There was no question that we would not vote for this unless it contained an authorization for a Western Mass. license,” Candaras said. “We were very clear about it.”

The Senate president joined with House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, D-Winthrop, and other top legislators to release the bill at a press conference late Friday.

DeLeo said it would be wrong to veto the bill since it would kill jobs at racetracks, prevent new local aid and block the creation of thousands of jobs at casino resorts. He said the governor should view the bill as a whole.

“I’m hopeful, once he looks at the bill, he will be supportive,” DeLeo said.

Kathleen C. Norbut, of Monson, president of United to Stop Slots in Massachusetts, issued a harsh statement against the bill, saying it is fraught with “hidden deals” and an example of poor government.

“This proposal is a bad bet for our Commonwealth that will lead to vast new taxpayer costs, increased corruption and crime, lost small businesses and increased financial burdens on host region municipal budgets,” Norbut said.

The Mohegan Sun, which operates a casino in Connecticut, is planning a $600 million casino for Palmer off Exit 8 of the Massachusetts Turnpike. The company has said it would bid for a license and has estimated the project would create up to 3,000 permanent jobs and 1,200 construction jobs.

The state’s four racetracks, two located in Boston and two in the southeast part of the state, would be eligible to bid for two slot licenses. If the winners are from the same region, each would receive 1,000 slots and a license would cost $20 million, the bill said. If they are from different regions, each would get 1,250 slots and a license would be for $25 million.

Stanley Rosenberg

Rosenberg, the Senate’s lead negotiator on the bill, said all slot revenues from the racetracks would go to local aid. That would raise about $100 million a year for local aid, he said.

Legislators said the bill would eventually generate about $400 million in new state revenues via taxes on gaming dollars at casinos and the racinos. They said the bill would eventually create about 15,000 permanent jobs in addition to construction jobs.

No smoking would be allowed in casinos, Rosenberg said.

The bill would generate about $11 million a year for preventing and treating addiction including problem gambling. There would be a $5 million assessment on casino operators and another $6 million from gross gaming revenues, according to a summary of the bill.

Rosenberg said it was key to secure a casino for Western Massachusetts. “We were very, very resolute that all parts of the state needed to be able to get the benefit of jobs that would be created,” Rosenberg said.

A five-member state commission would award licenses and oversee expanded gambling.

Rosenberg said a goal was to capture much of the $1.4 billion to $2 billion that Massachusetts gamblers currently spend at casinos in Rhode Island, New York and Connecticut. But he said casinos will not solve the state’s budget problems.

Charles D. Baker, the Republican candidate for governor this year, said on Thursday that if he were governor he would veto a casino bill with three resort-style casinos and two racinos and believes the state should only license one casino to start with.

Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill, an independent candidate for governor, said Patrick should sign the bill and not play politics with the economy. “With the construction industry suffering, unemployment at record highs, and hundreds of millions of dollars leaving our state each year, not voting to compete in the area of expanded gaming would be yet another setback for Massachusetts,” Cahill said.

The bill is a compromise of separate casino bills approved in the state House of Representatives in April and the Senate earlier this month. The Senate voted 25-15 in favor of casinos, the House, 120-37.